cameo appearance, the official inauguration pop-up store opened for business this week. >> i'm willing to help you. >> t-shirts, teddy bears, hats and tube socks. not just any tube socks, mind you. official tube socks. obama supporters can also pick up a medallion coin set for $7,500. >> a small piece of history that you can keep. >> for the budget conscious -- >> buttons. people are buying buttons. >> my merchandise, my buttons. >> everybody wants these buttons today. >> for just $2.50 a pop. barack buttons, biden buttons and if you're doing it up big, bo buttons. >> this one is the old one from the first family. i really like this one. >> congratulations, mr. president. >> thank you. >> fewer people are expected for the second obama inaugural and there are fewer activities, as well. but a die-hard obama fan with

the right hat can party anywhere she wants. thanks for watching "state of the union." i'm candy crowley in washington. head to cnn.com/sotu for extras and analysis. if you missed any part of today's show, just search us on itunes. this is "gps" the global public square. welcome to all of you in the united states and around the world. i'm fareed zakaria. a series of feisty debates on the hot topics of the day. we start with president obama's nomination of senator chuck hagel to be the next secretary of defense. we have a clash you will want to watch. then the relationship between the united states and russia keeps getting worse, whose fault is it? moscow or washington? a debate. also, the next fight in washington will be over the debt

ceiling. can president obama end this craziness and bypass congress altogether? we'll talk about the out of the box solutions and whether they would work. and, finally, this is the signature of the man who might be the next treasury secretary. we'll look back through history to see if there's any loopy president. speaking of secretaries of the treasury three former holders of the office and many other statesmen and women offering advice to the president on a new gps special tonight "memo to the president, road map for a second term." tonight at 8:00 p.m. and 11:00 p.m. eastern and pacific. first, here's my take. chuck hagel's nomination as america's next secretary of defense has drawn fire from people who say he's outside of the main stream. in fact, he's a pretty straight forward, traditional republican on most issues with a reluctance to go to war, born of knowledge and experience. where hagel does appear out of the main stream in washington's

world of group think is on iran. which i would argue is a good thing because washington desperately needs fresh thinking on the topic. in 2013, president obama will face a crisis with regard to iran. he has categorically ruled containing an iran with nuclear weapons. so, either iran will capitulate completely to american demands or the united states will go to war with that country. since the first option is extremely unlikely and the second extremely unattractive, the obama administration needs to see if there is a path through which it can pressure iran to make a deal. in a thoughtful essay in the current issue of "foreign affairs" the columbia scholar jurvis points out that this kind of coercive diplomacy, at least from washington, has rarely worked. he points out in panama, 1989, iraq, 1990, serbia, 1998, afghanistan, 2001 and iraq,

2003, washington tried sanctions pressure and the threat of force to get leaders to change course, it didn't work. and washington had to make good on its threat to go to war. with north korea, coercive diplomacy also failed, but in this case, washington decided against military action choosing, instead, to contain the regime. making coercive diplomacy requires a mix of threats and promises. with regard to iran, the administration has made the threats plenty of times. with clarity and credibility. but while the sticks have been handled shrewdly, the carrots have not. the united states is unable to define for itself or for the world what would be an acceptable deal and, most importantly, what it is willing to-do if tehran agrees to such a deal. would sanctions be lifted? which ones? would the u.s. stop its efforts to overthrow the regime? there have been many obstacles in the path of a deal from the

iranian side. but a former state department official writing in the cairo review of global affairs points out that tehran has recently signaled its willingness to compromi compromise. many officials have acknowledged that the iranians focus their bottom line on uranium enrichment at 3.5% level and sanctions relief. and its foregone nuclear facility are all fair game for compromise, but for the right price. so, let's try to find a price that makes a deal attractive to the iranians and to us. there are also real obstacles to a negotiated deal in washington and that is where chuck hagel's voice could make a difference. we need to make an offer that tehran can accept and tha we feel comfortable with. otherwise, 2013 will be the year that we accepted a nuclear iran or we went to war.

for more on this, you can read my column in this week's "time" magazi magazine. let's get started. when president obama chose the conservative republican for the post of defense secretary, you might not have expected opposition from the right, but you would have been wrong. while many conservatives support hagel's nomination, there is spirited opposition from the right. perhaps the first public opposition to chuck hagel was a column in "wall street journal" my foreign affairs columnist brett stevens. one of the first full throated defenses of hagel came in the "daily beast" from the editor of that website's blog and the author of the "crisis of zionism." joining me now bret stephens and

peter beinart. you accused chuck hagel of being anti-semi. >> i said there was an odor. >> what evidence do you have this is the case? >> he had this famous statement that i'm sure you heard several times by now about the jewish lobby intimidating a lot of people. a lot of the discussion had to do with this line, the jewish lobby. as opposed to say the pro-israel lobby which is a very diverse collection of organizations. some of them with very different motives. what got me really wasn't so much the adjective, although i found the adjective odd, it was the verb, intimidates. chuck hagel for 12 years was a senator from the state of nebraska. there are about 6,100 jews in the state of nebraska. i can imagine many lobbies that intimidated hagel when he was in the senate. the ethanol lobby, for example, the farm lobby, various other kinds of lobbies. the nra, the pro-life lobby and

so on. it's hard to see how he levels a charge that this lobby intimidates people. now, are there pro-israel groups that are lobbying on behalf of israel? absolutely. are there dozens, if not hundreds of lobbies in washington operating in the same way all the time. so, this peculiar charge that this intimidates senators was something i found very disturbing and, obviously, not alone in this view. >> but you have writing in the "times" essentially about your column. it is bullying and name calling to denounce people as antisemitic a far right gump that regularly shoots itself in the foot. in a world in which anti-semitism actually does persist, this is a devaluing the term so that it becomes simply a glib right wing insult. >> to be pro-israel is to be this far right, netanyahu and

people even further to his right. that's simply just not true. that is simply a character. by the way, absolutely. the term antisemitic unfair. but that does not mean that anti-semitism doesn't exist and the statements that kind of approach an anti-semitism aren't out there either. i sedan odor of prejudice. this is something he has to address. many other reasons, by the way, i oppose hagel's nomination. but that is -- >> wait a second. the column is titled "chuck hagel's jewish problem." and you, you level this charge. as far as i know, you didn't call hagel to ask him. you didn't call any jew in nebraska and call the rabbi in omaha who calls the charge stupid. who says that the charge is absurd. you simply leveled it. it seems to me, we should have, i say this as a jew, we should

have much higher standards than this kind of cavalier defamation of people because you didn't like one phrase they uttered seven or eight years ago. lobbies intimidate people. that's part of what they do. whether it's the gun lobby or health care lobby or unions. they're in the business of doing that. to say that because chuck hagel said it's true about the pro-israel lobby and used the term jewish lobby, which i agree is inaccurate which was also used by the conference of presidents of major jewish organizations last december, i really think was extremely unfortunate and i really hope you'll think again before doing so in the future. >> again, you responded to my column by being completely indifferent when it cams to the subjects of home ophobia. >> i said you have a different standard. >> you said that i didn't write about these subjects. >> i said you have a different standard and you do have a different standard. >> i demonstrated to you that i do. i do care about anti-semptiitis

and people should stand up and say this is extremely worrisomw. is it dispositive? no. but it ought to raise eyebrows. what i am stunned by. people moved to hagel's defense largely because he takes views that are not necessarily congenial to israel, including a lot of jews. people should -- >> wait. barack and israel's deputy foreign minister have both said he's a friend to israel. so, i don't know who it is who is exactly saying he's not a friend to israel. those people seem to have a lot of credibility on the subject. >> you think his views on israel and the middle east are ones, you think the united states should be following more closely. >> i think the important thing about hagel. in a way he would be the mayor. he is the guy in israel from the national security establishment who pushed back when benjamin netanyahu he felt was talking too cavalierly about the

prospect of war against iran. hagel has not moved out military force against iran. he ruled it in in an op-ed last fall. he said, again and again, very eisenhower ways. eisenhower was always saying, let's not pretend we can control war once it's unleashed. that's the point that hagel made again and again. >> what i find striking about this debate and this, i think, hopefully brings us to the larger debate about chuck hagel's world view is that if you are a skeptic of intervention, u.s. intervention in iran and certainly if you're against israeli military intervention in iran, as i think you are, peter, you couldn't possibly send a worst signal than to appoint chuck hagel as your defense secretary. you know, "new york times" has a profile of perez that was done back in july of last year before the election. it's about how the president of israel largely symbolic

position. adamantly opposed an israeli strike because he said, i guarantee you, if it comes to it, the americans are going to do it. so, a lot of the israeli calculation back in september and october when they were thinking about a strike was, no, let's hold off because we have some confidence that the obama administration, if it comes to it, we'll do it. if it's necessary. a lot of the people who supported president obama said, "mark my words. he is a man of his word, he does this quite seriously." then he turns around and appoints perhaps the most prominent skeptic of any kind of military intervention in iran as his defense secretary. if you're sitting in israel, you're wondering just how reliable is the united states and maybe we should go it alone. so, for that reason alone, simply the appointment of chuck hagel is going to make the israelis more skiddish and perhaps more prone to act. >> here's the irony. who said that military action against iran could prove

catastrophic? that was robert gates. our former defense secretary. who said that it could embroil us in a conflict that we can forget? that was leon panetta. it was true, bret, i think you are right that we need the military option on the table as hagel has repeatedly said. that does not mean we can't have a public conversation in this country about the tremendous dangers that war would bring. that to me is absolutely a conversation we have to have and being led by the pentagon because it's people in the u.s. military who are most concerned about this. >> all right, we're going to have to leave it at that and we will have a chance to have both of you back to have another spirited conversation. peter beinart, bret stephens, thanks for joining us. a new kind of cold war. the participants are the same and the weapons this time legislation. what is going on? we will tell you. th a find thousands of big deals now... at officemax.

i have a cold, and i took nyquil, but i'm still "stubbed" up. [ male announcer ] truth is, nyquil doesn't unstuff your nose. what? [ male announcer ] it doesn't have a decongestant. no way. [ male announcer ] sorry. alka-seltzer plus fights your worst cold symptoms plus has a fast acting decongestant to relieve your stuffy nose. [ sighs ] thanks! [ male announcer ] you're welcome. that's the cold truth! [ male announcer ] alka-seltzer plus. ♪ oh what a relief it is! ♪ [ male announcer ] to learn more about the cold truth and save $1 visit alka-seltzer on facebook. [ male announcer ] to learn more about the cold truth

i've always kept my eye on her... but with so much health care noise, i didn't always watch out for myself. with unitedhealthcare, i get personalized information and rewards for addressing my health risks. but she's still going to give me a heart attack. that's health in numbers. unitedhealthcare. you know it even after all these years. but your erectile dysfunction - you know,that could be a question of blood flow. cialis tadalafil for daily use helps you be ready anytime the moment's right. you can be more confident in your ability to be ready. and the same cialis is the only daily ed tablet approved to treat ed and symptoms of bph, like needing to go frequently or urgently. tell your doctor about all your medical conditions and medications, and ask if your heart is healthy enough for sexual activity. do not take cialis if you take nitrates for chest pain, as this may cause an unsafe drop in blood pressure. do not drink alcohol in excess with cialis. side effects may include headache, upset stomach, delayed backache or muscle ache. to avoid long-term injury, seek immediate medical help for an erection lasting more than four hours. if you have any sudden decrease or loss in hearing or vision, or if you have any allergic reactions

such as rash, hives, swelling of the lips, tongue or throat, or difficulty breathing or swallowing, stop taking cialis and get medical help right away. ask your doctor about cialis for daily use and a 30-tablet free trial. relations between washington and moscow have reached a new low. bringing back memories of the cold war. the current fit for tat started when the u.s. congress passed the black list russian officials alleged to have been involved in the death of russian lawyer bans them from coming to the united

states and freezes their assets. a broader list than that. russia responded with a ban on u.s. adoptions from russia and a threat to bar u.s. human rights abuses. some say this is all evidence of a new cold war. stephen cohen is a professor at nyu and william browder was his former employer and he is, of course, one of the biggest proponents behind the magnitski act. william, explain the importance of the act from your point of view? >> very simply, it is a piece of legislation which is sort of designed for the modern day problems of what's going on in russia. in russia, you have a regime which is basically out to steal as much money as possible from their own people.

when people try to stop it in any way, like sergeis magnitsky, they get killed. the corrupt running russia today and creates consequences outside of russia by banning their visas and freezing their assets in america. >> steve cohen, you disagree with the magnitsky act. >> i do for many reasons, but as you said in your introduction i think moscow and washington are sliding into a new cold war, which would be very bad for national security and the magnitsky act further poisons the relationship. mr. browder is right to a certain extent, but not quite as simple as he says. even though this may be this act just a lot of words, it will have consequences. for example, there are groups in moscow and in the united states that have a whole list of names

that they want to put on this black list. there are even people who want to put putin's name on it on the ground that he abused civil liberties. what would that mean for the relationship between president obama and putin, if they want to have an urgent meeting, let's say in the united states about missile defense or syria. this is a kind of cold war atmospheric poisoning that we don't need at this time. >> william, what do you think of this adoptions issue? why did they choose it and what effect do you think it will have? >> well, very simply, what it shows in the most harsh way is what putin is really all about. so, the magnitsky act came about and the russians said we have to react to it. they looked at the possible reactions. one reaction is to sanction american businesses, but then putin looked at it and said that might harm my own pocketbook. then they said maybe we'll do some type of reaction in terms of foreign policy.

when they looked at the sort of portfolio of how they could react, what they realized is they realized there was nothing they could not cooperate on because they are not cooperating at the moment already. they looked through their portfolio and said, wait a second. one thing americans want which we have, they want to adopt our disabled orphans. let's take that away from them. not even looking for a second at what that meant for these unbelievably vulnerable children. and, so, essentially what it shows is the absolute sort of lack of morales aof vladimir pewter. >> isn't it fair to say russia seems to be among some of these dimensions moving backwards. there is less freedom of speech, civil society and the state seems more abusive than certainly people like you had hoped ten years ago. >> certainly more than i had

hoped. speaking historically, since i am a historian, russian is now in one of its periodic cycles of repressive politics from the taliban. no doubt about that. but in the context of russia's history, it's a very mild cycle and it's interestingly enough from putin from the kremlin of a certain opening up of the political system, including the electrical system. i want to go back to something mr. browder said about putin. at the beginning, putin didn't like this ban of foreign adoptions and foreign minister who rarely strays from putin opposed it. things ran out of putin's control, i think. secondly, to say that russia is not cooperating in foreign affairs with america is an

astonishing statement. we are nearly largely dependent on russia for supplying nato troops in afghanistan. russia could have slowed in retalionatir retaliation to the magnitsky bill. there are many things russia could have done. even though it's obscene and it's bad, it's tragic. it's one of the mildest things russia could have done. >> since i have you both here, i have to ask you. william, what do you make of the other news out of russia? purdue deciding to take russian citizenship. the french moving to russia? >> well, i think there's one or two french people to russia depardieu and upset about the euthanasia of two elephants at the zoo and she's threatening to move to russia, as well. i don't think she's aware of the unbelievable animal cruelty they do in russia. just to put some perspective on

it. there are about 3 million educated russians who have left russia and emigrated and the retrograde society that they have there and putin needed some kind of pr stunt and he gets this sort of silly character to take russian citizenship and puts him up on stage and hope that will dissuade everybody from leaving russia. >> stephen, a sign of anything? >> just fun and games. >> no, it is fun and games. it is quite silly. but it has two potential serious consequences. first of all, it draws more attention in russia to putin's 13% flat tax. i mean, that is a very low tax in a country where inequality of income is just gigantic. right up there with america's inequality of income.

there is a lot of resentment among ordinary russians are paying only 13%. another side potential consequence. putin, russia is turning east. it's turning away from europe and that's the subject of a much longer discussion. but, putin, russia's two main allies in europe have been germany and france. the german relationship has soured. the french relationship has not soured. but if this goes down, this act or stunt of taking russia, by the way, he's not going to live in russia. he just took the passport. but if this goes down badly in france, for any reason, it will further fray russia's ties with the west and russia's turn to the east. that's not good for any of us, i think. >> stephen cohen william browder, thank you for joining

us. why in the world would the country's with the greatest oil reserves in for a year of complete upheaval. it's not saudi arabia, it's not iran, it's not russia. i will explain. searching for a bank designed for investors like you? tdd#: 1-800-345-2550 schwab bank was built with all the value and convenience tdd#: 1-800-345-2550 investors want. tdd#: 1-800-345-2550 like no atm fees, worldwide. tdd#: 1-800-345-2550 and no nuisance fees. tdd#: 1-800-345-2550 plus deposit checks with mobile deposit. tdd#: 1-800-345-2550 and manage your cash and investments tdd#: 1-800-345-2550 with schwab's mobile app. tdd#: 1-800-345-2550 no wonder schwab bank has grown to over 70 billion in assets. tdd#: 1-800-345-2550 so if you're looking for a bank that's in your corner, tdd#: 1-800-345-2550 not just on the corner... tdd#: 1-800-345-2550 call, click or visit to start banking with schwab bank today. tdd#: 1-800-345-2550 progress-oh! -oh! -oh! oh! oh! ♪ what do you know? oh! ♪ bacon? -oh! -oh! oh! [ female announcer ] with 40 delicious progresso soups

at 100 calories or less, there are plenty of reasons people are saying "progress-oh!" share your story for a chance to win a progress-oh! makeover in hollywood. go to facebook.com/progresso to enter. when i'm out with my kids, my daughter's like, "mom, wait up!" and i'm thinking, "shouldn't you have more energy than me? you're, like, eight!" [ male announcer ] for every 2 pounds you lose through diet and exercise alli can help you lose one more by blocking some of the fat you eat. simple. effective. advantage: mom. let's fight fat with alli. learn more, lose more at letsfightfat.com. learn more, lose more i've always kept my eye on her... but with so much health care noise, i didn't always watch out for myself. with unitedhealthcare, i get personalized information and rewards for addressing my health risks. but she's still going to give me a heart attack. that's health in numbers. unitedhealthcare.

or treat gas with these after you get it. now that's like sunblock before or sun burn cream later. oh, somebody out there's saying, now i get it! take beano before and there'll be no gas.

now for our what in the world segment. for 14 years, hugo chavez has been a troubling global presence. he has been an avowed critic of the capitalism and he is a

populist who some revere and others despise. venezuela's president is a fighter. last year it seemed like he had even defeated cancer but the cancer is back and chavez is said to be gravely ill. the newly re-elected president hasn't been seen for a month so when he couldn't attend his own swearing in ceremony on thirds, it sparked a natural set of questions in venezuela and around the world. what's next? whoever inherits the presidency, chavez will cast a long shadow. look at his record. on the one hand, the poorest are actually better off. according to the center for economic policy and research, poverty has declined by 50% since 2004. extreme poverty has declined by 70%. over the same period, college enrollment doubled and millions of venezuelans gained access to health care. many getting free housing and chavez announced on public television last year he will build 2 million homes for the poor. but look deeper and you'll see that the programs that created

these gains are built on an oil boom. they are badly designed and they are damaging the venezuelan economy. the economy is, frankly, in shambles. barclay's puts fiscal deficit at nearly 20% of gdp, one of the highest imbalances in the world. total debt has more than doubled since 2008. and that is despite the fact that venezuela has the greatest proven reserves of oil in the world. more than saudi arabia, iran or canada. when hugo chavez first came to power in 1999, oil was trading at $11 a barrel. today, it is trading at $111 a barrel. chavez has presided over the greatest windfall in his country's history. and, yet, venezuela is probably the only petro state in the world where people regularly suffer power outages. infrastructure is crumbling and public security is abysmal. venezuela has one of the worst

homicide rates in the world, worse even than colombia, honduras and mexico. venezuelan exports to the u.s. from the start of chavez's rule through 2011 added up to nearly $350 billion. that's iconic for a presidency which marketed itself as anti-american. but even that trend may be reversing. according to a "financial times" report for every 10 barrels of crude that are exported to the united states, venezuela now needs to import two back because it lacks refining capacity, which has been made worse by a recent explosion at a venezuelan refinery. in other words, america is selling oil to venezuela. meanwhile, chavez continues to ship a reported 100,000 barrels of subsidized crude oil to cuba every day. venezuela's people have gotten used to tall promises, free housing, essentially free gasoline and increasingly, the

state cannot afford it. it's popular to be anti-american and, yet, the money has been coming in from washington. cuba remains a staunch ally, but if it stops receiving cheap oil, it will pull out its tens of thousands of dollars from venezuela, which will destroy venezuela's health care system. all these years a popular hugo ch chavez has been masked all the flaws in his economy using oil wealth. but the problems are building. the next leader of venezuela will face the build up of all these problems and probably without chavez's charisma or guile. if you think balancing the budget in washington is difficult, spare for what caracas will have to do in the coming years. up next, the war in afghanistan told through the lens of one deadly battle. the story behind a recent great book. i'll talk to the author jake tapper, next.

that's when i had an honest conversation with my doctor. we discussed all the symptoms... then he gave me some blood tests. showed it was low t. that's it. it was a number -- not just me. [ male announcer ] today, men with low t have androgel 1.62% (testosterone gel). the #1 prescribed topical testosterone replacement therapy, increases testosterone when used daily. women and children should avoid contact with application sites. discontinue androgel and call your doctor if you see unexpected signs of early puberty in a child, or signs in a woman, which may include changes in body hair or a large increase in acne, possibly due to accidental exposure. men with breast cancer or who have or might have prostate cancer, and women who are or may become pregnant or are breastfeeding, should not use androgel. serious side effects include worsening of an enlarged prostate, possible increased risk of prostate cancer, lower sperm count, swelling of ankles, feet, or body, enlarged or painful breasts, problems breathing during sleep, and blood clots in the legs. tell your doctor about your medical conditions and medications, especially insulin,

corticosteroids, or medicines to decrease blood clotting. so...what do men do when a number's too low? turn it up! [ male announcer ] in a clinical study, over 80% of treated men had their t levels restored to normal. talk to your doctor about all your symptoms. get the blood tests. change your number. turn it up. androgel 1.62%.

i'm candy crowley in washington with a check of the headlines. hosni mubarak will get a retrial. mubarak was found guilty last june of ordering the killing of protesters in the uprising that led to his ouster. he is currently serving a life sentence. a date for his retrial has not been set. israeli police officers swarmed a palestinian protest camp in the west bank early this morning, taking 60 protesters into custody. they were, however, later released. in recent weeks the israeli

government had signaled its intention to build settlements in the area saying it would isolate the proposed palestinian capital of east jerusalem from the rest of the west bank. temperatures as much as 30 degrees below average are sweeping across western states and threatening to kill as much as a billion dollars worth of citrus fruits in california. that's according to the "l.a. times." overnight lows in rural california dipped into the mid-20s overnight while a freeze warning in phoenix, arizona, is in effect until tuesday. temperatures are expected to return to normal by the end of the week. those are your top stories. now, back to "fareed zakaria gps." 1 1 years and 3 months ago, the war in afghanistan began. this week, afghan president karzai met with president obama to discuss how the war will end. my next guest jake tapper has a terrific book about the war

called "the outpost." the book focuses on one of the deadliest battles in the war, a battle that tapper sees as a microcosm as the war as a whole. he covered the white house for abc news for the past four years and will soon be an anchor here at cnn, as well as our chief washington correspondent. welcome to cnn. and welcome to "gps." >> thanks, fareed, it's a pleasure. >> fascinating book. you know, to me, the stories you tell, as you say, it is a microcosm. one of them, they go to this village, the american troops go to this village in nuristan and insurgents streaming in from the border and one of the villagers asked them, are you soviets? are you soviet soldiers? the american tries to explain to them that the soviets left, the soviet union collapsed and there isn't any soviet union any more. you're dealing with remote parts of the world where they just -- to what extent do they

understand why we are in afghanistan? >> right. that's the amazing thing. obviously, not only are the u.s. troops that have been sent to this part of the world not fighting al qaeda, they are involved with a population that has never heard of the world trade center, that some of them know of the world trade center, but they thought the world trade center was in response to the americans invading afghanistan. so, how much their action is connected to what happened on / 9/11 is very much in doubt. i do see it as a microcosm because you have brave troops performing hurowically doing everything that is asked of them in that corner of the world and some of them make a difference and some win over the population, but, ultimately, it is a very, very impossible task for them to do without sufficient assets and sufficient man power and the mission keeps changing. >> when you talk about the, you know, these, the winning over

the population. what i wonder about is, at some point you leave and the realities on the ground reemerge, don't you think? >> absolutely. in fact, when i went to that part of the world, not last year, in 2011, that's what a villager in this one town that is focused on in the book says that they were always stuck between the americans and the insurgents and they knew who was going to be there in five years. insurgents were going to be there, americans were not. another thing that is interesting is, when they push into this part of the country, regional command east, eastern afghanistan, which is, obviously, an incredibly dangerous part of the country, of the war. it's not until 2006. so, the war has been going on for more than four years, almost five years even before we really even go into that part of the country. the colonel in charge of it at the time which is now general

nickelson he knows a counterinsurgency needs 14 years to work. 14. does anybody in the u.s. think that when they push it in 2006, 2006 that we're still going to be there in 2020? you know? >> the place that you're looking at is very close to pakistan and that's wherehe insurgents are coming from. safe harbor in pakistan. was there talk about how at the end, that is the crux of the problem. you are never going to be able to destroy this insurgency because it houses itself and gets replenished in a foreign country. >> all the time. in fact, pakistan is mentioned so many more times in the book than bin laden or al qaeda. it's like, you know, the enemy that dare not speak its name for the u.s. they do what they can do. obviously, the drone wars are being fought independent and separate in many ways. but, it's not just weapons and bad guys that are coming over the border, it's expertise. it's sharp shooters and snipers

and people who teach the locals how to build i.e.d.s. >> the thing that struck me about this is because all great stories about war often get, make you understand the disconnect between the very grand plan strategies at the top, even at the level of general mcchrystal and company and what it translates into for the guy. and i got a sense that those guys, american soldiers good guys trying to do their best, but there was such a big disconnect. >> it's unbelievable and it starts with the fact that they didn't have enough assets. it's not just a question of they needed more troops in afghanistan in 2006. although, probably any general would have argued that. and did. but they didn't have helicopters. they didn't have enough helicopters. so, when you don't have enough helicopters, you make decisions along the lines of, well, we're going to set up an outpost in this part of the country, which is very mountainous. we have to be near the road.

that's the only way to resupply it because we don't have helicopters. that ends up costing people their lives. >> fascinating. buy the book. thanks for joining us. up next, could a single coin save the u.s. economy? what if it was a trillion dollar coin? we'll explain.

twitter and the blogosphere lit up this week with an idea of how the president can get past the debt limit without congress.

an obscure paragraph allows the treasury secretary to mint a platinum coin of any denomination. the theory goes the treasury secretary can mint a trillion dollar coin and use it to get $1 trillion worth of credit at the fed? will it work and how about some more realistic ideas for getting through our next crisis. joining me now jeff toobin, cnn senior legal analyst and bruce bartlett. jeff, quickly, the trillion dollar coin, this isn't going to work, is it? >> legally, i think it could work. i think the law is unlike many laws, actually very clear. this is something that is within the secretary of the treasury's authority. he could issue this coin and it would get the u.s. government past the immediate stumbling block of the failure to raise the debt ceiling. that's a legal matter.

as a political matter, i think it's basically a nonstarter because it seems comical and it seems ridiculous. >> bruce, you suggest an alternate strategy which is one bill clinton has talked about and colombia law professors do. i have the implicit authority to raise the debt ceiling without congress, correct? >> that's right. of course, i'm not a legal scholar, but i do oppose the existence of the debt limit. i even testified before the senate finance committee that we should get rid of it. it's a dreadful left over from ancient history that simply creates opportunities for hostage taking by congress, such as the one we're facing right now and our foreign policy, we don't negotiate with hostage takers for a very good reason and i think that we need to get rid of this debt limit. but i'm perfectly willing to go along with the trillion dollar

coin, if that's what's necessary to prevent this hostage from being taken. >> so, jeff, take us through the constitutional argument here because the, as i understand it, the point would be the president would say to congress, by choosing to set taxes at a certain level and give us revenues at this level and by choosing to spend at a higher level, you are implicitly authorizing me to go out and borrow money, which i have to do as president to ensure that the laws are faithfully executed. >> correct. there is a provision of the 14th amendment to the constitution which one could argue implies that the president has to pay the debts. and he could simply ignore the debt limit to ignore the law and simply order the treasury bonds to be sold. interestingly, the obama administration, jay carney, the press secretary, has ruled out that approach. he has ruled out the unilateral

use of the 14th amendment. >> is it a weak argument? would it -- >> i think it's a lot more ambiguous, whether the president has that authority. that would be something he would be arguing is implicit in the 14th amendment, but it is far from obvious that that is one of his powers. the coin is very specific power. to the treasury secretary in a law passed by congress and signed by a president many years ago. so, i think just on a strictly legal basis, he'd be on a lot firmer ground, if he does the coin, than if he did the 14th amendment approach. >> bruce, you, again, predicted that this would be the big fight. that the fiscal cliff would not be the real issue. the debt ceiling would be. you see this as taking us close to the brink, again. could it take us over the brink? >> potentially. keep in mind that we have two other -- in addition to the debt limit. we have, in effect, two other

fiscal cliffs approaching. one is the appropriations bills for 2013, which have not yet been finished and we'll have a government shut down unless they have, unless those bills are enacted and the second is the $1.2 trillion sequester, which triggered the fiscal cliff, but was only delayed by two months and that runs out, as well. so, we have the debt limit, the sequester and the appropriations all essentially coming due at more or less the same date. some time next month. my assumption is, i guess everybody else's is, these are somehow whether they're rolled into together into one massive punt the ball down the road bill. >> jeff, if any of this does end up in the supreme court, you know, let's say the administration does some kind of legal maneuver, what's the history of this? when the court faces an executive legislative battle, do

they say this is political, not constitutional? >> most of the time in circumstances like this where you have the president and the legislative branch fighting, as they often have throughout history. the court really tries to stay out of it and says, look, this is, this is a political question. it's not a legal question. and we're not going to get involved. one of the very unsettled legal issues here. we talk about the legalley of the coin or of the 14th amendment. a legal doctrine called standing. who has the right to sue? it is far that anybody has the right to sue and challenge it. we could have a discussion about this. but, frankly, if the president does either of these things, it probably would never even be, be decided by a court, that a court would simply say, look, this is nobody has standing to challenge this. it is a political issue. you political branches figure it out, we're going to stay uninvolved. >> which means the court is essentially telling congress, if you think this is such a bad

idea, you're trying to impeach the president. >> that would be the remedy, unlikely, but not any sort of supreme court wagging its finger saying, you can't do that. >> for everyone who had thought we got through all our crises with the fiscal cliff. happy new year. thank you jeff toobin, bruce bartlett, we'll be right back. progress-oh! -oh! -oh! oh! oh! ♪ what do you know? oh! ♪ bacon? -oh! -oh! oh! [ female announcer ] with 40 delicious progresso soups at 100 calories or less, there are plenty of reasons people are saying "progress-oh!" share your story for a chance to win a progress-oh! makeover in hollywood. go to facebook.com/progresso to enter. when i'm out with my kids, my daughter's like, "mom, wait up!"

and i'm thinking, "shouldn't you have more energy than me? you're, like, eight!" [ male announcer ] for every 2 pounds you lose through diet and exercise alli can help you lose one more by blocking some of the fat you eat. simple. effective. advantage: mom. let's fight fat with alli. learn more, lose more at letsfightfat.com. schwab bank was built with all the value and convenience tdd#: 1-800-345-2550 investors want. tdd#: 1-800-345-2550 like no atm fees, worldwide. tdd#: 1-800-345-2550 and no nuisance fees. tdd#: 1-800-345-2550 plus deposit checks with mobile deposit. tdd#: 1-800-345-2550 and manage your cash and investments tdd#: 1-800-345-2550 with schwab's mobile app. tdd#: 1-800-345-2550 no wonder schwab bank has grown to over 70 billion in assets. tdd#: 1-800-345-2550 so if you're looking for a bank that's in your corner, tdd#: 1-800-345-2550 not just on the corner... tdd#: 1-800-345-2550 call, click or visit to start banking with schwab bank today. tdd#: 1-800-345-2550

the cube, london's underground celebrated its 150th birthday this week. it started with just a four-mile stretch and is the oldest subway system in the world. that brings to me my question of the week. which city can claim the biggest subway system in the world measured by length? "a" beijing, "b" new york, "c" london or "d" moscow. go to cnn.com/fareed for more of the gps challenge and follow us on twitter or subscribe to us on facebook. also, remember, if you miss a show go to itunes.com/fareed. this week's book of the week is an ebook.

david frum's "why romney lost." he believes that president obama was vulnerable and could have been beaten. but he details how the republican party blew it. trapped in a cocoon of tv commentators and consultants who fed it fantasies. it is very smart and it is quite short. now, for the last look. much has been made of the signature of jacob lou who, if confirmed, will be the nation's next treasury secretary. this could be on our currency. but on deeper examination, it seems that might never happen. tim geithner regular signature is this, but he says he changed it to this more legible version to sign your dollar bills. we asked a few of our favorite formers if their regular signatures were their regular signatures. reuben said he, too, changed his